Key Policy Letters Signed by the Education Secretary or Deputy SecretaryFebruary 7, 2007

February 7, 2007

Dear Chief State School Officer:

I want to take this opportunity to update you on several recent developments related
to the implementation of the assessment and accountability requirements of Title
I. Our primary goal continues to be for all students to reach grade-level standards
by 2013–14. I emphatically support the cornerstones of the No Child
Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB): all students must be held to challenging
academic content and achievement standards; their progress must be measured annually
by high-quality assessments aligned with those high standards; and schools and
school districts must be held accountable for achieving results.

One key step in achieving these goals is for each State to have a fully approved
assessment system that meets the requirements of NCLB. Annually assessing all
students is essential for tracking progress toward proficiency in reading and
mathematics and for determining areas where improvements in instruction and
achievement may be needed. Currently, 18 State assessment systems are Fully
Approved. Two State assessment systems are in Approval Expected
status, which means that the evidence submitted to date suggests that these
systems are fully compliant but a few final technical pieces must be peer reviewed.
I applaud these States for meeting the requirements of NCLB and appreciate the
hard work required to do so. The remaining States have an assessment system
that is in Approval Pending status. I remind you that all States must
administer a fully approved assessment system this school year or risk substantial
consequences. The Department remains available to provide technical assistance,
however necessary, to help States meet this deadline.

A second important step to meeting the goals of NCLB is school and district
accountability. As you know, in November 2005, I announced a pilot program for
up to ten States to use a longitudinal student growth model in their accountability
systems. The goal of this pilot is to determine whether measures of individual
student growth across grades can provide another measure of school accountability.
To date, I have approved North Carolina, Tennessee, Delaware, and Arkansas to
include their growth model in determinations of adequate yearly progress (AYP).
In addition, Florida’s model is approved provided its standards and assessment
system receives full approval by the end of the 2006–07 school year. Currently,
we are reviewing growth model proposals from an additional ten States to determine
whether they meet the requirements we have established for inclusion in the
pilot. Proposals that meet these principles will be forwarded to a group of
peers that includes both members from the original panel as well as a number
of new members. The peers will meet in March to review each proposal based on
the Peer Review Guidance (http://www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/growthmodelguidance.doc)
issued by the Department. I am pleased to announce that Dr. Anthony Bryk from
Stanford University will chair this review panel. The other peer reviewers,
who represent academia, private organizations, and State and local educational
agencies, are listed in Enclosure A.

I also would like to take a moment to update you on the December 2005 notice
of proposed rulemaking that would permit States to develop modified academic
achievement standards for a limited group of students with disabilities who
may not be able to reach grade-level academic achievement standards within the
same timeframe as other students. We expect, very shortly, to issue the final
regulations on this issue. During the drafting of the proposed rule and while
it was out for public comment, eligible States that expressed interest in developing
modified academic achievement standards were able to take advantage of interim
flexibility. For the 2004–05 school year, 31 States were permitted to
exercise additional flexibility in determining AYP for the students with disabilities
subgroup (based on assessments given during that school year). For the 2005–06
school year, 28 States were permitted to exercise this flexibility.

Today, I am announcing that I am extending this flexibility for the 2006–07
school year to eligible States. To qualify for this flexibility in 2006–07,
a State must assess all students and meet other specific core requirements of
NCLB related to students with disabilities (see www.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/raising/disab-acctplan.html
for those requirements and Enclosure B for a description of the flexibility
options). Please also note that we will take into account the approval status
of a State’s standards and assessment system when determining whether
a State is eligible for this flexibility. Any State interested in this interim
flexibility, including those previously approved, must submit an amendment to
its accountability plan providing recent data in support of its request.

A State that desires to take advantage of the interim flexibility or request
other amendments to its Accountability Workbook must submit to the Department
a written request, including the rationale for the amendment and any evidence
relevant to the effect the amendment may have on the State’s accountability
system. States should submit proposed amendments that apply to AYP determinations
based on data from the 2006–07 school year as soon as possible, but no
later than February 15, 2007. This timeline is designed to provide sufficient
time for the Department to review and approve the amendments and to notify the
State of such approval so that the State can apply the amendments without delaying
AYP determinations and school improvement identifications. I would like to emphasize
that the State must receive approval for its amendments from the Department
and incorporate them into its Consolidated State Application Accountability
Workbook prior to implementing any revisions to its accountability plan.
In an effort to improve the transparency of the accountability workbook amendment
process, this year the Department will provide formal feedback on all amendment
requests, including those we cannot approve.

Thank you for your continued hard work to make the goals of NCLB a reality.
We are beginning to see real and meaningful improvements in student achievement.
These outcomes are due, in no small part, to the efforts of the dedicated educators
in each State.